They Shoot Kashmiri Pandits, Dont They?

re:#138 by adnan_rafiq
Well said. A good post.
Sridhar

re: this article
FV`s article has made it to the Bharat-rakshak forum. This should be a new milestone for her.
Sridhar

Farzama#142
If you adopt the same tone in articles as you do in your Interacts, you will most certainly have fewer enemies. But I guess the confrontation-junkie in you would prefer to keep things the way they are:-)

A few points:

What is “shameless” about stating facts, when I give reasons for why Pandits did not become terrorists, considering their own leader has been asking the question? So when I say: “One, they were better-off and from 1947 to 1989, they had pretty much say in government matters.” It is true.
“They are mainly professionals, not artisans or small businessmen.” True.
“They lived a relatively safe life alongside their Muslim neighbours because Kashmir never was an Islamic state.” True. “They had a great deal of support from abroad.” True. There is organisational support.
“And there is a reason why they are called ‘migrants’ and not ‘refugees’. Because they chose to leave.” True.
“To now rail against the ‘heroes’ makes no sense if you cannot hold your head high and stay where you are.” True, in the context of the comment regarding the “islamisation of Bollywood”.
“I have to keep saying this: the campaign posters threatening them to leave were the work of the political forces.” True. Recorded in several places.

[The writer argues the pandit`s should take a stance for `kashmirayat.` How does she knows that Pandits do not. Does standing for Kashmiriyat only mean that they should support Kashmir joining Pakistan or separating from India? If they don`t,
should they be killed by Muslims?]

I said: “Whoever killed those 24 Pandits has only done it to make a ‘clash of civilisations’ scenario appear more glaring than it ever was. If the Pandits believe in ‘Kashmiriat’, then they should not agree to become willing pawns for their short-term interests.” Kashmiriat means seeing your identity as that of the State’s unique culture and lifestyle. By becoming willing pawns, they lose that and end up in camps in other states. Not many Muslims in Kashmir want to join Pakistan, though they might want a separate State, and that too after being let down by the Centre (that includes the past Congress governments) and people like Farooq Abdulla. Interestingly, the Pandits don’t care much for him either. No, I don’t think they should be killed. A bit surprising, isn’t it?

And, as of date, it is “unknown individuals” who killed the 24 Pandits. If any of you have further information, you might like to share them with the rest of us. Yes, the massacre in Gujarat too was by unknown assailants, but it went on for days and the government called it retribution. I do not think the Congress comes out smelling of roses anyway.

Yes, thanks for telling me to read my article again. I read it several times for I am not sure anyone else reads it. From the responses, I am not too far from the truth :)

temporal (#1):
[let me re-state for you and for the knee-jerk brigade that follows you what I wrote recently]

I agree it is a problem of GoI. Now, you have been accused of taking up for me etc etc etc…. and how it is an Indian issue and how dare you mention terms like knee-jerk. Strange, everything I say has been termed knee-jerk almost always. And interestingly, if you compare the posts on a Pak board, there will be many more Indians giving their expert comments, whereas very few Pakistanis visit Indian boards (Kashmir is sometimes an exception).

And…
I write for Chowk, the accusation goes, to run down Indians. And when I say I have done so in the Indian papers, I am told that it is because India tolerates such views and I would have had a tough time in Pakistan/Afghanistan or wherever it is they can get me a cheap ticket to.

Another amusing sidelight is that there is a detailed discussion (personal in its own way) about me on other boards where I do not even make an appearance. So from someone being my “soul-mate” to my seeking to portray myself as a victim…such gems are spouted. I am by no stretch of imagination a victim and no one really believes so, because I have been called rude by the same person, arrogant by another and various other things. Which is fine by me. Because, I do not want to be this poor thing. When I talk about Indian Muslims, it is a group, not about me.

And I think the falsehoods are repeated, so that a line out of context is seen as the whole. I have been quoted as saying “urstruly and other liberals”. What I had said was this: “I can thank whoever I want to. So a special thank you to urstruly and my apologies to the other liberal Pakistanis who have been forming their opinions based on what some ‘Indians’ here say.” (#129, ‘Excavating India’ board)

Another falsehood: A ‘new’ interactor appears on the above-mentioned board and says, “2. Don’t you think that remark about Hindus building and removing pandals anywhere and everywhere was deliberately offensive? It’s obvious you have no idea about Hindu practices! And there’s a vast difference between destroying a temple that existed (supposedly that’s what the excavations are supposed to prove or disprove)from about the 11th century at least to a makeshift pandal that is meant to be dismantled immediately afterwards.”

And what had I written? “A report says that the court has directed that the excavation must be carried out without disturbing the “makeshift temple” where the idol has been placed and the worshippers’ right of darshan should be maintained. This is precious. It is a known fact that Hindus install pandals at will anywhere and they can be moved at any given time.” I was not referring to the real temple.

Another falsehood: “that sick woman has gone as far as calling indian muslims to start a civil war...” In response, a thread on Unplugged was started:
“by temporal on March 28, 2003 2:58pm PT
Mr. saxena: Can you please provide the contextual link, quote, reference to above?”

The ‘evidence’ from my article is provided here…
[#3 by rsaxena on March 28, 2003 3:27pm PT
re: temporal
beta, don`t choke on these...enjoy...

{I say, thank god for Babar, for the dear departed Mughal badshah has revealed how the purring cats are jumping on a hot tin roof. I am happy today to cling to an heritage I have had no links with. The reason is simple. I am sick of peace marches, empty speeches and the gritty watchdogs of the media.}
{Why blame the Mughals? What do you expect of a colonial power? If anything, the Hindus should be thankful to them. }
{And today I place the blame on the Muslims. They have been too darned nice. }
{The time of the Muslim as underdog is up.}

I can well imagine the Indian Muslims getting all ready to watch the pigs fly and the ham turn to haleem.

Oh, but this is not my victim card. I feel like a “dynamo”. And mentioning these inconsistencies is just so that people realise that all is well with the world.

#139 ahmadzai

Hello, Mr. great secular person and advisor to Kashmiri pandits! Have you begun your demonstration outside Muridke? Shall I send you a 4 foot by 4 foot poster that says ``All people are the same, religion makes no difference`` ? If not, why not? Why is it OK to lecture us backward indians on how we should all live together, but your own society to focus on jihad?

To call you a hypocrite and shamelessly double-faced would be to insult those phrases in english language.

Ras (#69):
[Farzana, this time I will not commend your writing because frankly it irritates some of our other Indian friends here on CHOWK.]
Heck, you even get thanked for saying this and being understanding! My fellow Indians do not get the precious irony of this statement. That a Pakistani commending an Indian (you may not agree or like all that I say, of course) is a horrible thing to do, whereas they can have their little side-shows peacefully. And look what you started….

Godot (#92):
[WHAT’S GOING ON?
Why is Farzana so privileged to have 3 articles published within the span of two weeks at Chowk? Although her anger seemed amusing in the beginning, it is now tiring, stale, and leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Articles that manage to offend so many people and an entire community cannot be that good or worth wasting time reading. Yet they get published at Chowk one after another, 7 since December 11th.

If Farzana believes she is speaking the truth, then truth can be told without an attitude so many people find offensive. Little Chowk Staff seems to realize that it is the Chowk readers who are more important than the writers.

If Chowk’s idea is to build bridges between Hindus and Muslims and Pakistan and India, then Farzana is not helping build them but is setting the bridges on fire, making sure whatever path open to cross the unyielding and fearsome river of misunderstandings, bigotry and animosity between the two sides gets destroyed. And yet she gets published, one after another. Go figure.]

Wow. So godot, it is easy to access replies now, and if you take a look at your own responses, they do not seem like you found what you read “amusing”. And by it being “tiring…” now…when is now? FYI, on my ‘Twilight Freedom’ piece this is what you posted:

[#46 by godot on March 13, 2003 8:32pm PT
Btw, loved your Excavating India piece. You`ve thrown a bone and now watching the stray dogs attack it. Wonderful!!! You are one pissed-off woman, and justifiably so, I must say.]

And just hold your horses. What do you mean by “so many people and an entire community”? There are a handful of Indians without real names and identities who rave and rant in the cyberworld, and they do not represent the whole community, just as I do not represent all Indians, or Indian Muslims, or women or several other things.

Re. The number of articles, I think you might have discovered some other regulars as well. I get published because I am writing on topical issues; have you kept count on the articles on the Iraq War or on the World Cup? I am glad that Chowk, like several other media, is awake to this need to convey the varied opinions in time. Mine is not the only Indian opinion that gets published. About setting bridges on fire, do look at your own posts to some of my articles. You certainly did not convey any such worries.

I assume you believe the bigoted interactors on boards other than mine are working wonders for Indo-Pak amity.

I have received a letter from an Indian non-Muslim Chowkie and as I have not had time to seek his permission, he shall go nameless here, but what is said is relevant, and I quote excerpts (should he wish to identify himself, it would be wonderful): “That is why you get abused so much, because while India may be progressing in areas, there still remains, historically and socially, many many dirty secrets. To be reminded of this is to be reminded of inadequacy, and failure…I do not agree with everything you say Farzana, but I know that you love India and you only want what is best. But there are too many holy cows, pretensions, and assumptions being slaughtered, sometimes haphazardly, for them to accept.And to do it in front of Pakistanis! That is the worst thing ever. It is axiomatic that Pakistan is worse off than India in most ways, and there is nothing most Indians like better than to rub their faces in that fact. So to let the side down so much like you do Farzana, deserves spiteful retribution…”

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Frazana:

Thanks for the response. I have gone through the post and will go through it in detail.

I will say this, and I think I may have mentioned this to you before, your explanations after the fact (ie. the article) say more about your thoughts than does the article itself. Maybe the actual article needed to be less cryptic then, where you delineate the arguements as well as counter arguments in the main body. Just a suggestion..I will comment on your post later.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Farzana,

I have expressed my opinion of your ``output`` before and will not repeat it here. However, when you start to make factually incorrect statements like:

[quote]
And here we are talking about legitimate government. If non-Muslims wanted integration, the question of Panun Kashmir would not have arisen. And when you talk of non-Muslims in that State you are talking about 3 per cent of the population.
[end-quote]

I am forced to correct you. The population of J&K is approximately 9 million of whom roughly 65% are muslim. The rest are hindu with small buddhist and sikh minorities. Perhaps you are referring only to the Kashmir valley. Prior to the ``migration`` of the pandits and others, approximately 5% of the valley was hindu.

A few points:

What is “shameless” about stating facts, when I give reasons for why Pandits did not become terrorists, considering their own leader has been asking the question? So when I say: “One, they were better-off and from 1947 to 1989, they had pretty much say in government matters.” It is true.
“They are mainly professionals, not artisans or small businessmen.” True.
“They lived a relatively safe life alongside their Muslim neighbours because Kashmir never was an Islamic state.” True. “They had a great deal of support from abroad.” True. There is organisational support.
“And there is a reason why they are called ‘migrants’ and not ‘refugees’. Because they chose to leave.” True.
“To now rail against the ‘heroes’ makes no sense if you cannot hold your head high and stay where you are.” True, in the context of the comment regarding the “islamisation of Bollywood”.
“I have to keep saying this: the campaign posters threatening them to leave were the work of the political forces.” True. Recorded in several places.

[The writer argues the pandit`s should take a stance for `kashmirayat.` How does she knows that Pandits do not. Does standing for Kashmiriyat only mean that they should support Kashmir joining Pakistan or separating from India? If they don`t,
should they be killed by Muslims?]

I said: “Whoever killed those 24 Pandits has only done it to make a ‘clash of civilisations’ scenario appear more glaring than it ever was. If the Pandits believe in ‘Kashmiriat’, then they should not agree to become willing pawns for their short-term interests.” Kashmiriat means seeing your identity as that of the State’s unique culture and lifestyle. By becoming willing pawns, they lose that and end up in camps in other states. Not many Muslims in Kashmir want to join Pakistan, though they might want a separate State, and that too after being let down by the Centre (that includes the past Congress governments) and people like Farooq Abdulla. Interestingly, the Pandits don’t care much for him either. No, I don’t think they should be killed. A bit surprising, isn’t it?

And, as of date, it is “unknown individuals” who killed the 24 Pandits. If any of you have further information, you might like to share them with the rest of us. Yes, the massacre in Gujarat too was by unknown assailants, but it went on for days and the government called it retribution. I do not think the Congress comes out smelling of roses anyway.

Yes, thanks for telling me to read my article again. I read it several times for I am not sure anyone else reads it. From the responses, I am not too far from the truth :)

temporal (#1):
[let me re-state for you and for the knee-jerk brigade that follows you what I wrote recently]

I agree it is a problem of GoI. Now, you have been accused of taking up for me etc etc etc…. and how it is an Indian issue and how dare you mention terms like knee-jerk. Strange, everything I say has been termed knee-jerk almost always. And interestingly, if you compare the posts on a Pak board, there will be many more Indians giving their expert comments, whereas very few Pakistanis visit Indian boards (Kashmir is sometimes an exception).

And…
I write for Chowk, the accusation goes, to run down Indians. And when I say I have done so in the Indian papers, I am told that it is because India tolerates such views and I would have had a tough time in Pakistan/Afghanistan or wherever it is they can get me a cheap ticket to.

Another amusing sidelight is that there is a detailed discussion (personal in its own way) about me on other boards where I do not even make an appearance. So from someone being my “soul-mate” to my seeking to portray myself as a victim…such gems are spouted. I am by no stretch of imagination a victim and no one really believes so, because I have been called rude by the same person, arrogant by another and various other things. Which is fine by me. Because, I do not want to be this poor thing. When I talk about Indian Muslims, it is a group, not about me.

And I think the falsehoods are repeated, so that a line out of context is seen as the whole. I have been quoted as saying “urstruly and other liberals”. What I had said was this: “I can thank whoever I want to. So a special thank you to urstruly and my apologies to the other liberal Pakistanis who have been forming their opinions based on what some ‘Indians’ here say.” (#129, ‘Excavating India’ board)

Another falsehood: A ‘new’ interactor appears on the above-mentioned board and says, “2. Don’t you think that remark about Hindus building and removing pandals anywhere and everywhere was deliberately offensive? It’s obvious you have no idea about Hindu practices! And there’s a vast difference between destroying a temple that existed (supposedly that’s what the excavations are supposed to prove or disprove)from about the 11th century at least to a makeshift pandal that is meant to be dismantled immediately afterwards.”

And what had I written? “A report says that the court has directed that the excavation must be carried out without disturbing the “makeshift temple” where the idol has been placed and the worshippers’ right of darshan should be maintained. This is precious. It is a known fact that Hindus install pandals at will anywhere and they can be moved at any given time.” I was not referring to the real temple.

Another falsehood: “that sick woman has gone as far as calling indian muslims to start a civil war...” In response, a thread on Unplugged was started:
“by temporal on March 28, 2003 2:58pm PT
Mr. saxena: Can you please provide the contextual link, quote, reference to above?”

The ‘evidence’ from my article is provided here…
[#3 by rsaxena on March 28, 2003 3:27pm PT
re: temporal
beta, don`t choke on these...enjoy...

{I say, thank god for Babar, for the dear departed Mughal badshah has revealed how the purring cats are jumping on a hot tin roof. I am happy today to cling to an heritage I have had no links with. The reason is simple. I am sick of peace marches, empty speeches and the gritty watchdogs of the media.}
{Why blame the Mughals? What do you expect of a colonial power? If anything, the Hindus should be thankful to them. }
{And today I place the blame on the Muslims. They have been too darned nice. }
{The time of the Muslim as underdog is up.}

I can well imagine the Indian Muslims getting all ready to watch the pigs fly and the ham turn to haleem.

Oh, but this is not my victim card. I feel like a “dynamo”. And mentioning these inconsistencies is just so that people realise that all is well with the world.

(Oops, think I may have re-posted the last 3 notes)


Ras (#69):
[Farzana, this time I will not commend your writing because frankly it irritates some of our other Indian friends here on CHOWK.]
Heck, you even get thanked for saying this and being understanding! My fellow Indians do not get the precious irony of this statement. That a Pakistani commending an Indian (you may not agree or like all that I say, of course) is a horrible thing to do, whereas they can have their little side-shows peacefully. And look what you started….

Godot (#92):
[WHAT’S GOING ON?
Why is Farzana so privileged to have 3 articles published within the span of two weeks at Chowk? Although her anger seemed amusing in the beginning, it is now tiring, stale, and leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Articles that manage to offend so many people and an entire community cannot be that good or worth wasting time reading. Yet they get published at Chowk one after another, 7 since December 11th.

If Farzana believes she is speaking the truth, then truth can be told without an attitude so many people find offensive. Little Chowk Staff seems to realize that it is the Chowk readers who are more important than the writers.

If Chowk’s idea is to build bridges between Hindus and Muslims and Pakistan and India, then Farzana is not helping build them but is setting the bridges on fire, making sure whatever path open to cross the unyielding and fearsome river of misunderstandings, bigotry and animosity between the two sides gets destroyed. And yet she gets published, one after another. Go figure.]

Wow. So godot, it is easy to access replies now, and if you take a look at your own responses, they do not seem like you found what you read “amusing”. And by it being “tiring…” now…when is now? FYI, on my ‘Twilight Freedom’ piece this is what you posted:

[#46 by godot on March 13, 2003 8:32pm PT
Btw, loved your Excavating India piece. You`ve thrown a bone and now watching the stray dogs attack it. Wonderful!!! You are one pissed-off woman, and justifiably so, I must say.]

And just hold your horses. What do you mean by “so many people and an entire community”? There are a handful of Indians without real names and identities who rave and rant in the cyberworld, and they do not represent the whole community, just as I do not represent all Indians, or Indian Muslims, or women or several other things.

Re. The number of articles, I think you might have discovered some other regulars as well. I get published because I am writing on topical issues; have you kept count on the articles on the Iraq War or on the World Cup? I am glad that Chowk, like several other media, is awake to this need to convey the varied opinions in time. Mine is not the only Indian opinion that gets published. About setting bridges on fire, do look at your own posts to some of my articles. You certainly did not convey any such worries.

I assume you believe the bigoted interactors on boards other than mine are working wonders for Indo-Pak amity.

I have received a letter from an Indian non-Muslim Chowkie and as I have not had time to seek his permission, he shall go nameless here, but what is said is relevant, and I quote excerpts (should he wish to identify himself, it would be wonderful): “That is why you get abused so much, because while India may be progressing in areas, there still remains, historically and socially, many many dirty secrets. To be reminded of this is to be reminded of inadequacy, and failure…I do not agree with everything you say Farzana, but I know that you love India and you only want what is best. But there are too many holy cows, pretensions, and assumptions being slaughtered, sometimes haphazardly, for them to accept.And to do it in front of Pakistanis! That is the worst thing ever. It is axiomatic that Pakistan is worse off than India in most ways, and there is nothing most Indians like better than to rub their faces in that fact. So to let the side down so much like you do Farzana, deserves spiteful retribution…”

Re: #139 by ahmadzai

``Kashmir Banega Pakistan`` is not a slogan of the Kashmiris, by the Kashmiris and for the Kashmiris. It is a slogan engendered and nurtured in the cantonments of `Pindi, Lahore and Sialkot that aims to impose the religious homogeneity of Pak occupied Kashmir (PoK) on the rest of Jammu & Kashmir as well. The quarter million Pandits who have been living in refugee camps in Delhi or Jammu for the last dozen years are its most visible victims.